• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you support increasing taxes to pay down the national debt?

Conservative said:
Wrong, 2016 GDP inherited was 18.9 trillion, 2017 it was 19.6 trillion and the end of 2018 will be 22.0 trillion, get some help with your math
Click to expand...

From: https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TH]Year[/TH]
[TD]Nominal GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD]Real GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD] GDP Growth Rate[/TD]
[TD]Events Affecting GDP[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2010[/TH]
[TD]$14.992[/TD]
[TD]$15.599[/TD]
[TD] 2.6%[/TD]
[TD]ACA. Dodd-Frank.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2011[/TH]
[TD]$15.543[/TD]
[TD]$15.841[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Japan earthquake.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2012[/TH]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Fiscal cliff.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2013[/TH]
[TD]$16.785[/TD]
[TD]$16.495[/TD]
[TD] 1.8%[/TD]
[TD]Sequestration.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2014[/TH]
[TD]$17.522[/TD]
[TD]$16.900[/TD]
[TD] 2.5%[/TD]
[TD]QE ends.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2015[/TH]
[TD]$18.219[/TD]
[TD]$17.387[/TD]
[TD] 2.9%[/TD]
[TD]TPP. Iran deal.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2016[/TH]
[TD]$18.707[/TD]
[TD]$17.659[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Presidential race.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2017[/TH]
[TD]$19.485[/TD]
[TD]$18.051[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Trump Tax Act[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
MTAtech said:
From: https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TH]Year[/TH]
[TD]Nominal GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD]Real GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD] GDP Growth Rate[/TD]
[TD]Events Affecting GDP[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2010[/TH]
[TD]$14.992[/TD]
[TD]$15.599[/TD]
[TD] 2.6%[/TD]
[TD]ACA. Dodd-Frank.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2011[/TH]
[TD]$15.543[/TD]
[TD]$15.841[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Japan earthquake.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2012[/TH]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Fiscal cliff.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2013[/TH]
[TD]$16.785[/TD]
[TD]$16.495[/TD]
[TD] 1.8%[/TD]
[TD]Sequestration.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2014[/TH]
[TD]$17.522[/TD]
[TD]$16.900[/TD]
[TD] 2.5%[/TD]
[TD]QE ends.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2015[/TH]
[TD]$18.219[/TD]
[TD]$17.387[/TD]
[TD] 2.9%[/TD]
[TD]TPP. Iran deal.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2016[/TH]
[TD]$18.707[/TD]
[TD]$17.659[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Presidential race.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2017[/TH]
[TD]$19.485[/TD]
[TD]$18.051[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Trump Tax Act[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Click to expand...

I prefer using Treasury but will use yours since you insist, GDP in 2016 was 18.7 and in 2017 19.4 which is 700 billion dollars, GDP in 2018 will be at least 20.6 trillion or 1.2 trillion increase. See how easy math is when you try and aren't blinded by your ideology and hate. Percentage change is irrelevant as real dollars matter and 1.2 trillion is real dollars.

As for the Trump tax cut when exactly did that go into effect? wasn't it 2018???????
 
MTAtech said:
From: https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TH]Year[/TH]
[TD]Nominal GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD]Real GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD] GDP Growth Rate[/TD]
[TD]Events Affecting GDP[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2010[/TH]
[TD]$14.992[/TD]
[TD]$15.599[/TD]
[TD] 2.6%[/TD]
[TD]ACA. Dodd-Frank.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2011[/TH]
[TD]$15.543[/TD]
[TD]$15.841[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Japan earthquake.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2012[/TH]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Fiscal cliff.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2013[/TH]
[TD]$16.785[/TD]
[TD]$16.495[/TD]
[TD] 1.8%[/TD]
[TD]Sequestration.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2014[/TH]
[TD]$17.522[/TD]
[TD]$16.900[/TD]
[TD] 2.5%[/TD]
[TD]QE ends.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2015[/TH]
[TD]$18.219[/TD]
[TD]$17.387[/TD]
[TD] 2.9%[/TD]
[TD]TPP. Iran deal.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2016[/TH]
[TD]$18.707[/TD]
[TD]$17.659[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Presidential race.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2017[/TH]
[TD]$19.485[/TD]
[TD]$18.051[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Trump Tax Act[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Click to expand...

Now the rest of the story that you want to ignore



1 Gross domestic product

2016 1.5 2.3 1.9 1.8

2017 1.8 3.0 2.8 2.3

2018 2.2 4.2 3.4

the higher the base the more dollars generated and of course that affects percentage change. 2018 looks pretty darn good, +.4 +1.2 + .6 all adding up to what will be the 1.2 trillion dollar increase in GDP in 2018 over 2017

Some people, you, are simply incapable of admitting when wrong, why?
 
MTAtech said:
From: https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TH]Year[/TH]
[TD]Nominal GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD]Real GDP (trillions)[/TD]
[TD] GDP Growth Rate[/TD]
[TD]Events Affecting GDP[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2010[/TH]
[TD]$14.992[/TD]
[TD]$15.599[/TD]
[TD] 2.6%[/TD]
[TD]ACA. Dodd-Frank.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2011[/TH]
[TD]$15.543[/TD]
[TD]$15.841[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Japan earthquake.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2012[/TH]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD]$16.197[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Fiscal cliff.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2013[/TH]
[TD]$16.785[/TD]
[TD]$16.495[/TD]
[TD] 1.8%[/TD]
[TD]Sequestration.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2014[/TH]
[TD]$17.522[/TD]
[TD]$16.900[/TD]
[TD] 2.5%[/TD]
[TD]QE ends.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2015[/TH]
[TD]$18.219[/TD]
[TD]$17.387[/TD]
[TD] 2.9%[/TD]
[TD]TPP. Iran deal.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2016[/TH]
[TD]$18.707[/TD]
[TD]$17.659[/TD]
[TD] 1.6%[/TD]
[TD]Presidential race.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2017[/TH]
[TD]$19.485[/TD]
[TD]$18.051[/TD]
[TD] 2.2%[/TD]
[TD]Trump Tax Act[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Click to expand...

Another question how does any of that date refute what I have claimed about the dollar growth in GDP in 2018? Looks to me like it confirms it
 
Conservative said:
Another question how does any of that date refute what I have claimed about the dollar growth in GDP in 2018? Looks to me like it confirms it
Click to expand...
Easy -- because the differences in the table between 2017 and 2016 are greater than what you claimed 2018 growth was. Thus, if the growth was greater before the tax-cuts, it undercuts your argument that tax-cuts gave us amazing growth.
 
MTAtech said:
Easy -- because the differences in the table between 2017 and 2016 are greater than what you claimed 2018 growth was. Thus, if the growth was greater before the tax-cuts, it undercuts your argument that tax-cuts gave us amazing growth.
Click to expand...

Sorry but that isn't what you are showing and 1.2 trillion dollars is record growth in GDP for calendar year 2018 whereas your chart doesn't even show 2018
 
CriticalThought said:
Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?
Click to expand...

How bout we repeal the Trump/GOP tax giveaways to the wealthy 1% and corporations.
 
Conservative said:
How would you know, you spent way too much time projecting and ignoring the data generated. Some people probably not you are way too stupid to do research and take the easy way out buying what they are told. GDP growth, Job creation, state and local tax revenue, charitable contributions and historically low U-6 along with benefits generated by employees of those evil corporations tell a different story but hate has blinded people to reality
Click to expand...

Another deflection, not even related to what was said. We all know how copy (CTRL-C) and paste (CTRL-V). This seems to be the extent of your education.
 
Media_Truth said:
Another deflection, not even related to what was said. We all know how copy (CTRL-C) and paste (CTRL-V). This seems to be the extent of your education.
Click to expand...

And we know that actual verifiable and official data along with civics are something that are foreign to you and anyone else blinded by hatred
 
Conservative said:
And we know that actual verifiable and official data along with civics are something that are foreign to you and anyone else blinded by hatred
Click to expand...

Another deflection...
 
Perotista said:
I opposed Trump's tax cuts, the deficit and national debt being the main reason. To get a handle on the national debt, I doubt we ever will. To get that handles a combination of tax increases and spending cuts is needed. Just one or the other won't work.

So yes, I fully would support a tax increase as long as it was joined with real spending cuts. I mean real spending cuts, not this if my department was scheduled for a 10% increase over last year, but my department get a 5% increase. That isn't a spending cut although it sure would be portrayed big time as a 5% cut. A real spending cut would be if my department received 5% less money than it did the year before. That would be a real 5% cut and not the phony 5% cut from 10% scheduled increase down to 5%. That in reality is a 5% increase in spending.
Click to expand...

Our population grows every year and we have already neglected our infrastructure and technology sectors for 40 years because of tax cuts for the wealthy. Cutting essential Govt. programs makes no sense unless it is defense spending where there are billions in waste. Paying back the debt needs to be thru a wealth tax on the 1% if we really want to do it. They are the ones that ran up the debt with their low tax rates and miserly wage increases leaving half the nation too poor to contribute to our deficit thru income tax.


David Stockman is at it again. The Reagan-era budget director caused an uproar in 1981 by publicly decrying the moves of his boss to spur the economy with tax cuts. Now a private investor and author, he's pushing for a huge new tax on big earners. Stockman would subject the nation's top 10% of households to a levy equal to 30% of their wealth, payable over a decade. Without it, he maintains, the U.S. will wind up in a horrific, Greece-style debt wreck.
Click to expand...

https://www.barrons.com/articles/david-stockman-soak-the-rich-1381515461
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
Our population grows every year and we have already neglected our infrastructure and technology sectors for 40 years because of tax cuts for the wealthy. Cutting essential Govt. programs makes no sense unless it is defense spending where there are billions in waste. Paying back the debt needs to be thru a wealth tax on the 1% if we really want to do it. They are the ones that ran up the debt with their low tax rates and miserly wage increases leaving half the nation too poor to contribute to our deficit thru income tax.




https://www.barrons.com/articles/david-stockman-soak-the-rich-1381515461
Click to expand...

I truly feel sorry for you and your class envy, jealousy and total ignorance of how our economy works and what money goes for infrastructure. You obviously don't get out much as you spend so much time here bashing Trump and Republicans to see what is going on in the country. So sad to see someone so married to the leftwing ideology and filled with hatred for a President
 
iguanaman said:
Our population grows every year and we have already neglected our infrastructure and technology sectors for 40 years because of tax cuts for the wealthy. Cutting essential Govt. programs makes no sense unless it is defense spending where there are billions in waste. Paying back the debt needs to be thru a wealth tax on the 1% if we really want to do it. They are the ones that ran up the debt with their low tax rates and miserly wage increases leaving half the nation too poor to contribute to our deficit thru income tax.




https://www.barrons.com/articles/david-stockman-soak-the-rich-1381515461
Click to expand...

When it comes to defense, congress uses the military as a job creator and maintainer for civilians back home. There has been many times the JCS has stated we don't need this, we have too much of that, we can't use this. But congress in orders the military to purchase it to keep and create jobs back home funds the unwanted programs anyway.

If congress would just give the military what it needs to maintain national security and defense of this country, it could be cut by 100 billion a year easily. At no harm to security or defense. But that would mean loss of civilian jobs back in congress's home districts and states. You can't have that.

I have seen DRMO sales of new equipment, never used, stored in warehouses for ten years auctioned off for a tenth of what the original cost was. Why? Congress made the military buy this stuff even when the military said they didn't need it and had more on hand than they could ever use.
 
CriticalThought said:
Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?
Click to expand...

I would support 2 cents on ever dollar.

IF ...the federal government began cutting out the redundant agencies and departments within.

And, cutting back on all foreign aid, and securing the border once and for all.
 
Crovax said:
Without rasing taxes that would be nearly impossible.
Click to expand...

Actually with minimal economic growth and absolutely NO spending increases, it could be done. As the debt is paid down the interest payments as a fraction of spending goes down enabling increases were wanted without actually increasing the overall budget.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Actually with minimal economic growth and absolutely NO spending increases, it could be done. As the debt is paid down the interest payments as a fraction of spending goes down enabling increases were wanted without actually increasing the overall budget.
Click to expand...

Paying the debt off in 20 years would mean paying over 1 trillion a year just on debt. Thats pretty much the entire discretionary budget.
 
Conservative said:
Please post any lie that I have stated? It would be great if you understood civics and how authorizes spending by the President.
Click to expand...

Easy - just look at any of your responses stating that the deficits don't usually rise under Republican presidents, and fall under Democratic presidents.

US_federaldeficit.webp
 
Media_Truth said:
Easy - just look at any of your responses stating that the deficits don't usually rise under Republican presidents, and fall under Democratic presidents.

View attachment 67250050
Click to expand...
As stated the only fact you offer is deficits rising but your civics challenged education won't let you explain why

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
If we're going to be honest with ourselves... paying off the national debt would be a hard hit on everybody... A HUGE reduction of federal spending [especially welfare programs] would be necessary...
 
Conservative said:
As stated the only fact you offer is deficits rising but your civics challenged education won't let you explain why

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Lies on top of lies. See my point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom